Religions And The Muslim Philosophy!

Religions and the Muslim Philosophy!

By: H.A. Yahya, Professor of Sociology

It never came to my mind to stand against the basic beliefs of the religions of God.  The different and changing testimonies of the followers of these religions make me defend philosophy in the face of  practiced religions of the world. It is my position, that if a certain religion promotes hatred of other religions or beliefs,  is not a religion. And therefore, it should be attacked on the basis of justice. If  the laws of each religion justify hatred of other religions, then it should be understood, that my actions are also, justified.

Philosophically speaking,  mind is the basic ingredient of human differentiate him from animal, and therefore, human should use their minds to promote happiness in life Not in the unseen life. Reality described by philosophers through the separation of Spirit and Body. While spirit cannot be defeated or demolished completely, as we know,  the body is limited by age. Age is limited by years, but soul is not limited by years.

Mind should be the strong castle of human to defend superstitious ideas and metaphysical phenomena. Limitation of human mind is combined with limitation of humans’ age on earth. Other humans may continue using the mind to continue the march toward unfolding knowledge about the Universe. But one human cannot do so. The works of old philosopher are leading but not completing the modern human mind. Socrat,  Galileo, Christ, and Pain and many others were excluded  from their communities and paid their lives for what they believe in. Their intuition was leading humans to use their minds for the purpose of having happy life, by applying the logic of this life at its best.

Religion and Time: The majority of the ignorant theology, and the powerful authority in the absence of logic have lost in historical events, the essence of human existence on Earth. Even in these days of 2008, the world still governed by the majority ignorant or the powerful authority who believe that war for example, is the only way to protect the self or the  nation’s interest. Unfortunately, the knowledge obtained so far, about the world was used to destroy it. Or to destroy human happiness. We know that values are changing, the good of the past is no more good in present .  Values of the rich is very much different from the poor values.  And values of ignorant people are different from those of well advanced in knowledge.

Human Being is no more living for their family, wife, and kids, They are working for their own pleasures. Money is no more serving the purpose of basic needs, it becomes numbers like human beings. Numbers without feelings, without minds, without souls. Money should not be an end by itself, but a means to survive and serve those who need it. Look for the Oil producing countries, how they are fooled by oil companies. Oil is contributing in the world misery of millions of people in poor countries around the world including the countries producing or consuming oil.  In the poor countries, war between religious sects is inevitable, and in the rich countries, the distance between poor and rich is sky rocketing.  So you might ask, what is the solution for the world to come to mind?

This is a good question, and it makes anyone-including myself-nervous. But to be nervous, is not the right way to answer the question. The question, anyhow, is part of the answer. The terms used in the question, how? Read it again, we may replace the first term (what?) in the question by the last term (mind) to become, “mind is the solution for the world to come to.” As you see, the solution  is using the mind. Not emotions or feelings or faiths. It is simply the mind which lead us to understand ourselves, to understand  our environmental surroundings, the nature, and the creatures in it. Is this hard to grasp or comprehend ? I did not think so.  In the case of religions, if Jews, Christians, Muslims or any other faith followers use their minds to solve their problems, especially in Palestine, sure they will be able to reach a conflict-free world all over. (709 words)

 

Modern Philosophy Of Religion – ?I’ll Have A Mocca Easter To Go Please?

The scent of cinnamon, windows steamed up by the burning oven, a little girl with hair as gold covered in flour and smiling at you. The yellow sun warming your neck, the smell of freshly cut grass and the twinkle in the eye of the eight year old boy in front of you holding up a painted egg. Holidays go well together with cosy family moments. Whether it’s baking a cake for Mother’s Day with your daughter or enjoying the neighborhood kids searching for Easter eggs in your backyard, these days are of special meaning to us.

The roots of Easter lay in a warm land overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. After Moses had brought back the people of Israel from their exile as slaves in Egypt, this was the place they settled. The decided they would hold an annual celebration of the fact they escaped from their Egyptian rulers. This holiday was called Pesach and is celebrated to this day by Jews all over the world. One of the Jews who celebrated this holiday and travelled to Jerusalem each year to do so, was Jesus. The last year he sat down to the festive meal of Pesach with his entourage is now history. For not long after that final supper Jesus was crucified and his body was placed in a cave with a large rock covering the entrance. On the third day after his death Jesus resurrects and the cave was empty.

This resurrection of Jesus is what we commemorate with Easter. So at the heart of this holiday is a spiritual and miraculous event. Quite in contrast with the decorated window displays and storefronts we see each year. No sign of suffering, no crosses, no resurrection. If we look at other holidays the same applies: the original meaning of the holidays has moved more and more to the background. A lot has been said about how the meaning of holidays seems inferior to the profit they produce. But for once, let’s not dramatically mourn this ‘rampant commercialism’ or mindlessly indulge ourselves rushing through some warehouse in search of that one imperial Easter egg to trump the neighbors. Let’s not immediately pick sides on whether it’s a bad thing the meaning behind our holidays is not as apparent as it used to be. Let’s refrain from judgment and simply wonder how this occurred.

You see, these complaints are not even new. The loss of rituals in daily life, the limited time people spent on their spiritual growth and the decline of influence of the church have been lamented for more than four centuries now. It is not a typically modern phenomenon. Ever since the Enlightenment people have become more and more responsible for the way the shape their lives. This process has gone hand in hand with people evading institutionalized religion. And although people in the West seem less inclined to visit church, study their bibles or even inform themselves on the underlying meaning of the holiday they are celebrating, most of them are still in search of some form of spirituality.

But as modern man evolved, so did his spiritual needs. As he became more individualized so did his path to meaning in his life. We all casually combine Tai Chi or Yoga with Ikebana, faithful to the post-modern creed that ‘there is no one truth, but all the more perspectives on it’. Emancipation of our own thinking and our own beliefs has led us to each our own story. That is precisely the way we treat our holidays. We pick, mix and match even the things that are sacred to us. We choose which holidays we wish to celebrate, and the way we would like to celebrate them. Making sure that even performing rituals and acknowledging the meaning of these holidays suits our best convenience.

And although the last paragraph seems to suggest discomfort from yours truly, I can assure you: there is none. For the worth of philosophy or comparative religion studies lies in the understanding, not in judging. It helps us get a glimpse of who we are and how we became like this. Coming to terms with what we find, is a whole other story.

Jos van de Mortel, MA is Lexicom Learning’s tutor for the online courses in Philosophy and Comparative Religion.

Lexicom Learning | http://www.lexicomlearning.com

In the Lexicom Learning courses ‘Philosophy’ and ‘Comparative Religion’ we try to gain a greater insight into the human condition, to understand the range of human possibilities, to broaden our own horizons through an appreciative study of others and ourselves. Visit http://www.lexicomlearning.com to start your online course today.

(c) Lexicom Learning 2010

Philosophy Of Religion: Main Topics

Philosophy of Religion

While theology of religion begins from a particular religious framework, philosophy of religion approaches religion from a purely rational and secular viewpoint. Philosophy of religion is the use of the philosophical method to study religion. It is not the study of a particular religious doctrine, rather is the study of the very nature, value, substance, and truth of religion.

The main themes studied under philosophy of religion are the existence of God, religious view of man, immortality, the problem of evil, religious experience and mysticism, religious knowledge, religious language, and religious conversion. Each of these themes is philosophically analyzed to determine the truth of religion.

1. The Existence of God

The existence of God is a major concern of the philosophy of religion. There are many views regarding the nature and existence of God, chief of which are polytheism, pantheism, monism, dualism, and monotheism. When talking of the existence of God, philosophers are mainly concerned with the monotheistic concept of God as presented in the Bible. The traditional proofs for the existence of God are three, viz., the ontological argument, the cosmological argument, and the teleological argument. The ontological argument advanced by St. Anselm contends that since God is the greatest conceivable being, his existence is necessary; for if He didn’t exist, He would be equivalent to nothing and anything is greater than nothing, therefore anything would be greater than Him. However, nothing can be greater than Him because He is the greatest conceivable being. Therefore, God necessarily exists. The cosmological argument is the argument from cause and effect. It is based on the assumption that there cannot be an infinite series of cause-effect relations since that would never be exhaustible making it impossible to arrive at the present; therefore, the universe must have a cause which is uncaused and this uncaused cause of the universe is God. The teleological argument is the argument from order and design in the world. It contends that only the existence of an intelligent designer can explain the order and design of things in the universe. This intelligent designer, it claims, is God.

Critics have pointed out that the arguments for God’s existence are inadequate explanations. For instance, Hume pointed out that the cosmological argument is based on the unproven premise that effects follow cause, while the teleological argument at the most can prove that the great designer is an imperfect being. He argued that polytheism is more easily inferable from the design argument than monotheism. In his words, ‘‘A great number of men join in building a house or ship, in rearing a city, in framing a commonwealth; why may not several deities combine in contriving and framing a world?’ In the same way, Kant saw in the classical arguments nothing but mental jumbles that disclosed nothing about reality. In fact, Kantian skepticism doesn’t permit any proof that points beyond phenomena. In recent times, however, Christian philosophers such as Alvin Platinga have argued that belief of God can be regarded as a foundational belief that doesn’t even demand a proof, since it is basic.

2. Immortality

Immortality refers to the indestructible quality of the human soul. According to Plato, the fact that all knowledge is recollection is proof that the soul is immortal though the body is mortal. Further, since life is an attribute of the soul, the soul cannot participate in its opposite, viz., death. Therefore, the soul can never die. Thus, the soul is logically seen to be immortal.

There are others who find in moral justice a ground for the immortality of soul. For, they argue, if the soul is not immortal, then justice is not guaranteed to all and injustice is elemental to the universe. The reality of justice demands a life hereafter in which the soul is rewarded good or evil for the deeds it has done in the body. Different options are present for a philosopher before he can come to any conclusion by philosophical analysis. The materialistic notion is of annihilationalism, according to which the soul is coterminous with the body and dies with it. Reincarnationalism, on the other hand, argues that the body dies but the soul, which never dies, takes in a new body each time; thus, changing bodies as one changes garment. The Biblical teaching is of a resurrection in which the wicked will be resurrected to damnation while the righteous will be resurrected to life and glory. Annihilationalism doesn’t explain the administration of justice. Reincarnationalism cannot explain how the soul can be eternal and not just immortal and yet be finite at the same time. The theory of non-dualism attempts to relegate reincarnation to the deluded Self. However, it fails in adequately explaining how this Self came to be deluded. The linear aspect of time in the doctrine of resurrection, with its assurance of justice is the most logical alternative.

3. Religious Experience

Religious experience may be defined as a ‘seeming insight into usually unseen dimensions of existence, revealing something of intrinsic value and fundamental importance.’ It can be divided into four kinds: prayer, conversion, mysticism, and near-death experiences. Feeling the presence of God and receiving answers to prayer is a kind of religious experience. Conviction and insight are part of the experience of religious conversation which clearly manifests itself in a change of life. One other important kind of religious experience is mysticism in which one seems to have a direct intuition of reality. Some people who have experienced the near death tell of some supernatural experiences that they had when they were near death. Experience of either light or a dark tunnel feature much in such accounts. All such experiences have been attempted to be explained physiologically or psychologically. Philosophy acknowledges the fact that these experiences cannot be challenged by those who have not experienced them; however, it still remains to trace the logical implications of any beliefs connected with such experiences and to establish whether there exists any other source of knowledge apart from reason or empirical experience.

4. Religious Language

Religious language refers to the nature of the language used when talking about God and supernatural things. Some believe that language is equivocal and that it cannot be used to speak about God, who can only be spoken about via negative, i.e., by means of negation. Others believe that words that refer to God and humanity mean the same thing. There are also those who StressFreeFast.com” rel=”StressFreeFast.com”>stress the analogical aspect of religious language, according to whom language in religious discourse is analogous to language in secular discourse. However, logical positivists like A. J. Ayer and Rudolph Carnap have argued that all religious language is non-sensical since none of it is empirically understandable. The criterion of logical positivism, in turn, has been proven to be non-sensical since it is itself empirically unproven. The best position regarding religious language seems to be the view of ‘forms of life’ according to which religious language is only understandable to those who share in the particular form of religious life. To others, such language might make no sense. As Paul said, ‘the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.’

Thus, philosophy attempts to investigate the metaphysical and epistemological implications of religious doctrines. It also analyses the aspects of the religious life and experience that carry philosophical implications.

Conclusion

To a Christian theologian, both theology and philosophy of religion are of utmost importance. Theology of religion enables him to biblically evaluate the value and position of universal religious phenomena with reference to Christianity. The position one assumes is of great importance since it decides his theological approach to missions as well. For instance, if a theologian is a pluralist, he would be dissuaded from any attempt to evangelize or convert people of non-Christian religious groups and thus would reinterpret mission as anything but the conversion of unbelievers. On the other hand, an exclusivist would see conversion and discipleship at the core of mission. Thus, one’s theology of religion has a decisive role in one’s ministry.

Similarly, philosophy of religion also has an important role to play in the life and ministry of the theologian. This is so because philosophy gives an overall picture of religious faith, practice, and experience in general and provides a common tool for evaluation. It helps to make a logical and rational assessment of the value or demerit of religious beliefs. It also helps one to understand the source or grounds of certain religious beliefs. However, it must be remembered that there cannot be a purely unbiased form of philosophy of religion since no one approaches religion with a blank slate of mind. Yet, philosophy of religion does offer a common ground for dialogue between world religions. Therefore, philosophy of religion is of great importance to a theologian. Thus, both theology and philosophy of religion are greatly beneficial to an individual preparing for or in ministry.

© Domenic Marbaniang, 2007

Dean of Post-Graduate Studies, Professor of Theology, Religions, and Missions, Author, Editor of Theological Journal, and Pastor